The Revolution starts in Tuva?

Paul Goble reports:

The Republic of Tuva is calling on Moscow to eliminate a key element of Vladimir Putin’s power vertical: the power of the central government to appoint representatives of Moscow bureaucracies in the regions without reference to the views of the governments of the country’s republics and regions.

While this legislative initiative is unlikely to be approved by the Duma as would be required, it does reflect the rising tide of anger in Russia’s regions and republics against what they see as Moscow’s failure to address their problems, a tide that has already spilled over into unrest over the center’s appointment of an outsider to a federal post in Daghestan.
Encouraged by President Dmitry Medvedev’s recent remarks about the need to optimize the relationship between Moscow and its representatives in the regions, Tuva is preparing a draft law that would force federal agencies to secure the approval of the governor before appointing anyone to a position in a federal agency representation on his or her territory.
The regions had enjoyed that right, Dina Oyun, an advisor to the Tuvan government said, until the early years of this decade when Moscow “took this right away” during its efforts to limit the power of the regions relative to the center and to eliminate the power of local clans “in cadres policy” (www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=1116295&NodesID=2).
True, she continued, in 2005, then-President Vladimir Putin issued a directive to the federal agencies telling them to “inform the governors in advance of the appointment” of officials in the regions. But that did not give the regional heads a veto and thus did not ensure that the appointees understand the problems of the regions they were assigned to.
“Kommersant” reports that no Duma deputy was prepared to comment on the Tuvan idea, but the Moscow paper added that “in the expert community, there are great doubts about the prospects of the Tuvan initiative.” The force structures will never agree, the experts said, and economic ministries maintain offices in the regions only because the constitution requires it.
But the Tuvan initiative is not the only indication, in the words of Georgy Chizhov, the vice president of the Moscow Center of Political Technologies, that regional elites are seeking to “revisit the line toward centralization that was strengthened throughout the entire decade of the 2000s.”
Chizhov points to complains by the leaders of Tatarstan and Bashkortostan but he suggests that these do not constitute “a tendency” because so far they have not had “any legal consequences.” But these are having a political impact because Moscow cannot fail to recognize that the regions are increasingly angry about the center’s striving to control everything.
Meanwhile, the anger about the center’s appointment power continues to bubble over in Daghestan where a large crowd, many of whom carried weapons, yesterday sought to prevent Vladimir Radchenko, Moscow’s appointee who was accompanied by a group of guards, from getting into his office (www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=1116240).
“The incident could have grown into an armed confrontation,” “Kommersant” reported yesterday, noting that “Mr. Radchenko intends to leave the republic for an [unspecified] time.” But the situation is unlikely to quiet down anytime soon, especially given reports that the son of Daghestan’s president may have been involved in the attack on Radchenko this past weekend.
Some observers have suggested that President Mukhu Aliyev has orchestrated the whole thing both to cover up his own corruption by distracting public opinion and to play to the populist nationalism now rising in Daghestan. But others have said that the incident is part of an effort by his opponents to discredit him (www.kavkaz-uzel.ru/articles/149381).
However that may be and however angry the regions now are about what Moscow is doing to them, there is one group at the center which very much wants to impose even tighter control over what the regions are doing during the current economic crisis. That group is the pro-Putin United Russia Party.
Its operatives are discussing sending special anti-crisis managers from within its ranks to serve as special advisors and administrators alongside governors, even though members of the party currently occupy the leading posts in 74 of the 83 regions and republics in the Russian Federation.
That plan, Sobkorr.ru commentator Sergey Petrunin observes, bears a frighten resemblance to Stalin’s decision to send 25,000 activists to the Soviet countryside during collectivization. Those activists, who knew little or nothing about local conditions, not only failed to help but made things worse (www.sobkorr.ru/news/498FC2A8C09D6.html).
Whether the “new 25,000-ites” will make things as much worse seems unlikely, but if United Russia goes ahead with its project, this group of emissaries from the center almost certainly will further enflame anti-Moscow feelings in the regions and republics and lead to more demands from there to modify if not destroy Putin’s power vertical.

43 responses to “The Revolution starts in Tuva?

  1. Putin’s power vertical is a big boon for Russians and a big obstacle for its enemies. Russia must be a single whole. Any blether about local differences is a propaganda of Russian enemies or criminal elements who just intend to avoid a criminal liability.

    LA RUSSOPHOBE RESPONDS:

    Sure, just like Stalin’s power verticle was, right?

    Unlike Russia which is a single whole Ukrainian and Georgia must be confederacy because people of different part of that contries have very contrary opinions about economic, policy, relations with Russia and West countries etc.

    LA RUSSOPHOBE RESPONDS:

    Ever heard of a little place called Chechnya?

  2. Russian,

    First of all, democracies are able to handle differences in opinion between different people with different ideas. Large countries with strong regional identities have a specific structure called Federalism to deal with this. The US works this way, as does Germany. In fact, Russia is SUPPOSED to work this way which is why it’s called the Russian FEDERATION. Putin, however, has more or less gutted federalism in Russia, between the mass murder called a war in Chechnya and the establishment of direct appointment of governors in the provinces.

    Secondly, yes, Russia does have regional differences. Take Primoriye, for example. There is no doubt that the population there is essentially loyal (the ethnically Russian part anyway – the Chinese immigrants are another matter that Russia will have to deal with in the future), but have strong differences of opinion with the central government on issues such as tariffs on foreign cars. Federal structures are a much better way to deal with this than, say, sending OMON troops out to crush them the way that a unitary state would do.

    Thirdly, Ukraine and Georgia might actually benefit from a federal structure (although in the latter case, this necessity would be largely contingent of the return of Southern Ossetia and Abkhazia, which seems unlikely at best.) Crimea, in fact, does enjoy a status of autonomy that reflects the confederation you request. The problem is that there is a nation, Russia, which consistently acts to provoke and encourage separatist tendencies wherever it can in the former USSR – Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea, Donbass, Ruthenia, and Transnistria just to name a few. If a foreign power were to act in a similar manner in any of the North Caucasian Republics, for example, or the Middle Volga Republics, there would be absolute outrage. In fact, you consistently excoriate the US for its role in supporting pro-democracy movements within nations that are recognized as independent from Russia. One can only imagine how you would feel if it would happen inside your recognized international boundaries.

  3. LR

    “Stalin’s power verticle was, right?”

    There are Stalin’s power verticles are in Ukraina and Georgia now. People of some region in Ukraina (from Kharkov to Sevastopol where live almost half Ukrainian citizens) do not want to speak in Ukrainan language and demand
    to give for Russian language a government status. But power verticle of Youshenko has refused to perform such demands voluntarily. As result – there are revolution situation in Ukraina. The most people in the est Ukraina WILL NEVER SPEAK IN UKRAINIAN. So there only one way to avoid crash Ukrainian political system – transformation this country into confederation of free countries with neutral status. In other way Ukraina will be destroyed by Youshenko’s power verticle in the nearest future. Georgia also have such problems (Only instead of Russians element there are Armenians, Azerbaijanian, Chechens, Mingrelian, Adzharian elements).
    Unlike these countries Russia is really federation and right of local people are guaranteed. All of Russian national republics have own language which have a status equal with Russian language in the given territory. All of Russian federation members have so much authority that Georgian and Ukrainian regions can not even dream. Chechnya have a wide autonomy in the inner affairs. Almost 100 % chechens voted to be a part of Russia.

  4. I have heard the demands and they are patently ridiculous.

    Throughout all Ukraine there are several Russian language schools in every city and even in the West, Russian is accepted as a de facto language of government and commerce. Ukraine simply cannot run otherwise. As for television stations – approximately half of the stations are Russian language. Again, having to do with the fact that so many of the people speak Russian.

    I’ve talked before about the Chechnyan referendums and what 100% results really mean (i.e. it wasn’t a fair vote.). Chechnya now is little more than a gangland turf – at best comparable to Chicago in the 20’s, except that Chechnya’s Al Capone wouldn’t have to worry about the FBI sending the untouchables since the backbone of the gang just happens to be FSB agents.

    The main difference between Russian “autonomous” regions and Ukrainian ones is the active interference of a foreign power (namely, Russia.) Russia didn’t have to worry about this in its republics because the main opposition in Chechnya, Tatarstan, and so on would be hard-line Islamists. And sure enough, given the choice between Putin and Osama Bin Laden – Chechnya chose Bin Laden until persuaded otherwise by Russian bombers and tanks. The same thing is now happening in Ingushetia and Daghestan. In fact, there are suicide bombings happening right now throughout the Russian Caucasian republics. In other words, they have less in common with Georgia and Ukraine and more in common with Palestine and Iraq.

  5. Scott

    “One can only imagine how you would feel if it would happen inside your recognized international boundaries”.

    Really US have supported all separatist movement in Russia since 1991 and until nowadays. The fact that Russia still exists is against the wishes of western countries (especially some group such as editors and most of readers of la russorhobe). The fact that Russia still exists is a indicator of Russian inner unity and good work of Russian secret services. I repeat Russia in spite of its great size and multycultural structure is a historical and cultural single whole. Unlike Russia Ukraina is a new country and people many Ukrainian regions do not relate themselves to Ukraina some of them hope return their regions in Russia the others wishe announced a new independent countries. It would be quite true to permit these people to sutisfy its demand (in consideration of old and new precedents from desintegration of USSR and Jugoslavia to Kosovo and Abchazia-Ossetia).

  6. I am Russian (aka: I am a nationalist thug),

    You really are either amazingly ignorant or just some kid trying to stir up LR with your noticeably contradictory pro-Stalinist comments.

    I don’t know if I’ve ever met someone who has the ability to stick their head in the sand quite like you do. You seem to be living in a fantasy land. Perhaps you should try reading a few history books (from sources other than official government propoganda) to find out why there are so many Russians in the east of Ukraine. Ever heard of Stalin’s induced famine? Ever heard of the concept of forced repopulation of the regions with Russians? Ever heard of the ideas behind divide and conquer? Yes, Stalin did his homework, he knew all about keeping people divided so that unity against their overlords was impossible. Have you ever read a history book? Ever??

    The entire existance of Transnistria was a Stalinist border idea. Moldova as it is now was never a country outright before Soviet times, but was a region of Romania (Moldavia) – that was annexed by the Soviets. Stalin created such boundaries to keep the masses divided, so they wouldn’t rise up for independance. And on top of that, what possible justifiable reason is there that Russians remain in Transnistria? Not to mention dozens of other similar examples where Russians don’t respect other nations’ borders. Your arguments in the comments above would suggest that Russia should respect other nations, just as they want to be respected themselves. You say that “almost 100% of Chechnyans voted to stay in Russia?” Do you really believe that? Have you ever heard of fair elections?

    From what i’ve read of your comments over the last few weeks, all you seem interested in is your egotistical Russian pride. Get off your high-horse, and perhaps get an education that isn’t just pro Soviet propoganda and anti-western hype. Russia’s ills aren’t the fault of “the west”.

    I’m starting to wince every time I read your ignorant babble, and I’m sure every one else who reads this site does. Actually, why do you comment here? Maybe you are just a clown trying to stir the pot because it’s funny to you?
    I’m starting to think you surely aren’t serious. I mean, it’s embarassing.

    One day you will come to realise why the world is wary of Russia. It will probably be the day you get the midnight knock on the door for saying something that didn’t quite kiss the KGB’s butt’s enough. When you are on your way to the gulag or a fake trial for something you didn’t say, then you will start to realise you were just another useful idiot to Putin, being the cheerleader to the bully.

    You are a part of the problem. You think of yourself as a nationalist, but you are a part of the system that keeps your country living under totalitarianism.

    And that, my friend, is really sad. You’d rather shoot the people who are striving to create a better world for themselves, be it Russians or their former Soviet slave states, instead of actually trying to improve things. People like LR are just trying to do their bit to improve the world, whilst you waste all your energy trying to belittle their efforts.

  7. Lest see “I am Russian”, in Georgia the rights of ethnic minorities are respected. Not only are there “Full Immersion” Russian schools where all subjects are taught in Russian, Russian & English are compulsory subjects in all schools.
    In addition there are government schools which teach in the languages of the Azeri, Armeninan, and in Pankisi Chechen langauges.
    By the way, Mingrelians are Georgian, it is a dialect of Georgian, like Imeretian, or Kakhetian, or Svan. If you say to a Mingrelian that he or she is not Georgian they will punch your lights out and tell you that they are the best Georgians. Considering that the 1st elected president of Georgia, Gamsakhurdia, was a Mingrelian I think that, as usual, you are a complete fu*kwit.

  8. Andrew

    The most of national minorities in Georgia are unhappy about fact that Georgia is a unitarian repubic. They would be glad to get administrative autonomy status the likes of Russian ethnic region.

    Quote: “In addition there are government schools which teach in the languages of the Azeri, Armeninan, and in Pankisi Chechen langauges.
    By the way, Mingrelians are Georgian, it is a dialect of Georgian, like Imeretian, or Kakhetian, or Svan. If you say to a Mingrelian that he or she is not Georgian they will punch your lights out and tell you that they are the best Georgians. Considering that the 1st elected president of Georgia, Gamsakhurdia, was a Mingrelian I think that, as usual, you are a complete fu*kwit.”. Unquote.

    Dear Andrew Ukrainian language (Malorossijskaja mova or Malorossijskij jazik) is a dealect of Russian language too. And many Ukrainians in Crimea or Donbass or Ruthenia etc. will punch your lights out If you say that a they are not Russian people. And many Ukrainians took part in Russia and later USSR political life in our history (e.g. Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Chernenko).
    But Russia were headed by Stalin too. Stalin was a georgian. Does it mean that all of the Russian people are georgians too? USA are headed by Barak Obama now. Barak Obama is Black. Does it mean that all of the USA people are Black too? Yours arguments are idiotic as usual. I know some Mingrelians (they live in Russia now) who correct me and said that they are not a Georgians.
    You said that Georgian hate us because we support Ossetia and Abckazia. Well we supported them only 14 years later their factual separation and after attack Saakashvilly 08.08.08 who did not give us any other chance. Really georgians must hate their post-Soviet leaders (Gamsakhurdia, Shevarnadze, Saakashvilly) and nationalism of huge part of georgians.

  9. G
    “The entire existance of Transnistria was a Stalinist border idea”.
    “Have you ever read a history book?”
    Yes I have unlike you obviously. And I correct you that Transnistria was announced itself in 1989. In 1989 Stalin was already dead.

  10. “They would be glad to get administrative autonomy status the likes of Russian ethnic region.”

    what do you mean by “ethnic region”?

    Is it just an area populated by people who speak a certain language and have a certain culture or do you mean an administrative region that is populated by non-Russian-speakers?

  11. er…

    Is it just an area populated by people who speak a certain language and have a certain culture

  12. Russian,

    Firstly, despite the fact that you constantly claim that Ukraine is a beautiful country and you have nothing against it, you display some severe “Moskalsky” tendencies. Ukraine is NOT a new nation. Ukrainian national identity began forming even before the Lithuanian liberation of Western Rus from Mongol domination, and had pretty much solidified by the Union of Lublin, certainly asserting itself at the time of Khmelnitsky. While there is an East-West divide, the divide has to do with HOW to relate to Russia rather than whether to secede and join it. In fact, The Party of the Regions caters almost exclusively to the needs of East Ukrainians, at least when it isn’t taking orders of its Muscovite masters, and it is nearly impossible to get anything done in the Verkhovna Rada without its support. Can any Russian minority claim such political clout in the Duma?

    While Ukrainian and Russian are closely related, they are distinct languages. They largely share a common morphology and grammatical structure, but differ widely on vocabulary – Ukraine getting many of its words from Polish and other Western sources rather than Russian. Besides, if you think that Ukrainian is just a dialect of Russian, why do you make such a big deal over the grandiose lie that Russians in Ukraine aren’t being allowed to use their own language? And by the way, if you were to so much as refer to Ukrainian as “Malorossaya” anywhere in Ukraine, you would not have your lights punched out – you would be killed stone dead before morning.

    As for parts of Ukraine not relating to the national structure – that really only holds even partially true in Crimea, which never belonged to Ukraine until 1954 when it was transferred as a “gift” by Krushchev in honor of the 300th anniversary of The Treaty of Pereyaslavl. Even there, if one is to consult the true “natives” of Crimea, the Tartars, who were ethnically cleansed from the region by Stalin and only returned recently in the thaw, they are pretty much unanimously in favor of Ukrainian sovereignty rather than Russian annexation or independence. In fact, there are actually regions of Russia which are still ethnically Ukrainian – mainly the Kuban region to the East of the Straits of Kerch.

    In short, you’re making the old claim that there’s really no such thing as Ukraine – it’s just a wayward part of Russia. Putin believes the same thing, which is why he screws up when he tries to do anything in Ukraine – he simply cannot see why anything he does alienates Ukrainians (even “Russified” ones) so much.

    As for your contention that the US has supported separatist movements within Russia, to quote a certain Russophile, “Horsefeathers.” First of all, in 1991, no one was more interested in maintaining the integrity of the Soviet Union than George Herbert Walker Bush (except Gorbachev, of course.) The US was 25th in line to recognize the Baltic States – and Mongolia was #24! The US only recognized the breakup of the USSR around Christmas, about three months after pretty much everyone inside the USSR had done so.

    Inside the Russian Federation, US policy has been to support Russian integrity, preferring to work with the devil it did know, and shoring up Yeltsin’s reign, seeing him as someone they could work with. This continued under early Putin and if anything, only intensified. This is not due to any goodwill on the US’s part, but rather that most of the separatist movements in question were in Islamic Republics, and this was the middle of the War on Terror. Putin used this fear to his advantage, gaining carte blanche to pursue the war in Chechnya as viciously as he wanted, knowing full well that Conservatives in the US would only view it as part and parcel on the War on Terror, and American Liberals (Soros excepted) would be too focused on US war atrocities to care about those of any other nation. Even American military training of Georgian troops started as a measure to contain the Chechens hiding in the Pankisi Ridge.

    Although Transnistria was only formally recognized in 1989 (largely to water down the then growing Moldovan nationalist sentiment), it did exist in Soviet times. Then it was called the “Republic of Moldova” as the area beyond the Prut was Romanian territory. Stalin’s claim to modern Moldova (then called Bessarabia, as Romanians consider Moldova to extend through the Northern half of their country) was in fact as an extension to this modest strip of territory. (And Bessarabia was Russian territory from 1812 until 1917.) All history aside, it is yet another of the concentrations of Russian expats being used to stabilize or destabilize a foreign nation, in this case Moldova, whenever Putin sees it useful to do so, and ignore when he doesn’t.

  13. Scott

    You have a pity knowledge about Russian geography. Transnistria was never belong to Bessarabia. And Moldavia is a historical group which are distinguished from Romania as well as Ukraina from Russia and Mingrelia from Georgia. Mentioned above paars of country are very similar and have a single origins. If you said about Moldova as part of Romania and Mingrelia as part of Georgia so you must recognize that Ukrainian is a part of historical Russia. It would be fairly. If you think that Ukraina is not a part of Russia then such way must be use for Georgia-Mingrelia and Romania -Moldavia. It also would be fairly.But you are western person and so you use a double standarts (especially in the ethnical problems).

  14. Russian – If you read what I wrote closely, you would have noticed that when I discussed Transnistria, I referred to it as the part of the current Moldova that was NOT part of Bessarabia, and that Stalin took the Bessarabian part on behalf of the “Moldovan” people that were on the USSR’s side of the Dneister.

    As for the historical Moldova – take a look at Romania on a historical atlas. The western part of modern Romania is called Transylvania (as in that place Bram Stoker’s Dracula comes from), the Southeastern part is called Wallachia (which is the place the historical Dracula came from.) Finally, the Northeastern section, between where the Danube flows into the Black Sea and the Prut river, is what was historically known as Moldavia, or Moldova in Romanian. The area betwen the Prut and the Dneister was known as Bessarabia. Transnistria is north of that. (Thus the name Trans meaning across, and Nistria, from Dnistr.) The Soviets simply transferred the name Moldova to the Transdnister so that they could later lay claim to the regions south of the Dniester in the name of “national sovereignty.” As a side note, Fascist Romania, when it occupied lands north and east of the Dneister as far as Odessa, they called it Transnistria as well.

    I I also at no time said that modern Moldova should belong to Romania. My point was that Putin, as he often does, was using Transnistria to destabilize Moldova whenever he felt he could squeeze something for himself by doing so.

    I can’t comment much on Mingrelia, and haven’t because, to be honest, I don’t know that much about it, so don’t put arguments into my mouth which I have not made.

    As for Ukraine, however, it becomes increasingly clear which one of us has any inkling at all about Ukrainian history and politics. And that someone certainly isn’t you. Someone who knew about Ukrainian history, culture, or linguistics would certainly not use the word “Maloros” or any term derived from it to describe Ukraine. Literally translated, it means “Little Russian.” (And being a native Russian speaker, you obviously know that.) At best it is an anachronism largely abandoned at the Time of the October Revolution, and even then only used by Russians to describe Ukrainians rather than Ukrainians to describe themselves. (When they didn’t use the term Ukrainyets, they used the term “Rusyn” as in Ruthenia. No “Malo” – that’s a Russian Chauvinist invention.) It is at best the equivalent of calling an African- American “colored.” When used by one Ukrainian to describe another, it is in fact, a term insulting to Ukrainians, implying that they have abandoned their Ukrainian identity for the benefits of a Russian one. It is rougly equivalent to calling an African-American an “Oreo”.

    It reveals you as the outright Russian chauvinist that you are. And frankly, no one is better than using double standards than you. Every time Russia is or may be accused of something, your first instinct is to deny it despite the overwhelming evidence, and your second is to project it either onto the US or onto Georgia and Ukraine in tandem. I have never seen you, for example, apply your same standards to say, Nagorno-Karabakh or Kara-Kalpakia for example, let alone in any case involving the Russian Federation itself.

  15. Well in that case, what about the Mari people who aren’t allowed primary (not to mention higher) education in their own language? Even though they have at least nominally their own republic within the Russian Federation and they make up just over 40% of that republic Russification is very heavy:

    “The ethnic Mari people are under heavy Russification and Leonid Markelov has ordered many Mari language newspapers to close.[citation needed] Many ethnic Mari activists live under fear of violence. The Mari activist and chief editor Vladimir Kozlov was badly beaten after he published criticism toward Leonid Markelov’s politics.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mari_El

    I can already hear you sprouting something about how russification is really a good thing and benefits the native Mari’s and while that might be true for within the Russian Federation – doesn’t that simply negate your previous point of how every group of people deserves to have cultural autonomy? And also, if it benefits some indigenous people who just happen to live in Russia to learn the Russian culture and language, then why would it not benefit other peoples living in other countries to learn the culture and language of the country they live in?

    The trick is to have a bit of tolerance both ways but Russia wants to have all. Not all or nothing, Russia just wants all.

  16. “I am Russian”, well I have neighbors and friends who are Mingrelian, and they definitely consider themselves Georgian.

    As for your pathetic comments “You said that Georgian hate us because we support Ossetia and Abckazia. Well we supported them only 14 years later their factual separation”

    Horsefeathers! To quote you. As usual you have no factual understanding of history.

    The fact is that in 1992-94 the Russian military & government supported the ethnic cleansing of Georgians from Abkhazia & South Ossetia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Abkhazia

    I mean we all know you are an idiot, but the historical facts are plain to see.

    “Significant human rights violations and atrocities were reported on all sides and peaked in the aftermath of the Abkhaz capture of Sukhumi on September 27, 1993, which was followed by a large-scale campaign of ethnic cleansing against ethnic Georgian population (officially recognized by the OSCE and also mentioned in UN resolution GA/10708).[6] UN Security Council passed series of resolutions in which is appeals for a ceasefire and condemned the Abkhazian policy of ethnic cleansing.[7] From 13,000 to 20,000 ethnic Georgians and approximately 3,000 Abkhaz have been reported to be killed, more than 250,000 Georgians became internally displaced or refugees and 2,000 are considered missing.”

    “Although Russia officially claimed neutrality during the war in Abkhazia, Russian military officials and politicians were involved in the conflict in several ways. Russia was the main source of weapons for both conflicting sides, it unofficially supported the Abkhaz side and finally Russia also carried out some humanitarian operations.[23]

    Russian arms used by Georgia were transferred to it under the bilateral agreements with Russia and included main battle tanks, armored personnel carriers, heavy artillery and heavy mortars. The whole Akhaltsikhe motorised rifle division was turned over to Georgia on September 22, 1992.[24] Some weapons were gained by local raids on Russian Army bases in Akhalkalaki, Batumi, Poti and Vaziani by irregular Georgian paramilitary forces.[25] After several attacks Russia declared it would defend its bases with force.

    Prior to the outbreak of the war, the Abkhaz leadership arranged for the redeployment of a Russian airborne battalion from the Baltic States to Sukhumi.[26] According to the Russian historian Svetlana Chervonnaya, a number of Russian security servicemen also arrived in Abkhazia as “tourists” during that summer: “The main load in the preparation of Abkhazian events was given to staff of the former KGB. Almost all of them got appointments in Abkhazia under cover of neutral establishments, which had nothing to do with their real activities. To distract attention, various ruses were resorted to, such as the private exchange of apartments, or the necessity of moving one’s place of work to Abkhazia due to a sudden deterioration of health.”[27]

    According to another Russian expert, Evgeni Kozhokin, director of the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies, prior to the outbreak of hostilities, Abkhaz guardsmen had been supplied with weaponry by Russia’s 643rd anti-aircraft missile regiment and a military unit stationed in Gudauta. Ardzinba had major supporters in Moscow as well, including Vice President Alexander Rutskoy and the Chechen speaker of the Russian parliament, Ruslan Khasbulatov.[28][27]

    After the eruption of armed conflict, the Abkhaz separatist paramilitary units, along with their political supporters fled to Gudauta from where they obtained significant amount of military and financial aid.[12][29] In Gudauta, the Russian Army base housed and trained Abkhaz paramilitary units and provided protection for the leader of the Abkhaz separatists, Vladislav Ardzinba.[12] The high level of corruption in the Russian military also contributed in the leakage of Russian arms to both sides.

    From the outset of the hostilities Russia called upon both sides to negotiate and it brokered several ceasefires, which mostly proved ineffective (Sukhumi offensive was undertaken by the Abkhaz side in violation of the previous ceasefire agreement). On the other hand, the Russian military offered protection to the retreating Abkhaz detachments during the summer 1992 Georgian offensive. In November 1992, the Russian Air Force conducted heavy air strikes against the villages and towns in Abkhazia predominantly populated by Georgians. In response, the Georgian Defense Ministry accused Russia for the first time in public of preparing a war against Georgia in Abkhazia. This led to the Georgian attacks on targets under Russian and Abkhaz control and the retaliation from the Russian forces.[30]

    The Russian attitude began to tilt further to the Abkhaz side, after a Russian MI-8 helicopter (reportedly carrying humanitarian aid) was brought down by Georgian forces on October 27, which triggered retaliation from Russian forces. On December 14, 1992, the Russian military suffered the loss of another military helicopter, carrying evacuees from Tkvarcheli, resulting in 52 to 64 deaths (including 25 children). Although Georgian authorities denied any responsibility, many believed the helicopter was shot down by the Georgian forces. On 16 December, the government of Georgia requested the Russians to evacuate their nationals from Abkhazia via other routes, foremost the Black Sea, but also to limit the number of missions flown from Gudauta, the main Russian air base in the area.[30] However, this incident “raised the level of general malevolence in the war and catalyzed more concerted Russian military intervention on the Abkhaz side.”[31][9][32] The town of Tkvarcheli had been besieged by Georgian forces and its population (mostly Abkhaz, Georgians and Russians) suffered a severe humanitarian crisis. Russian military helicopters supplied the city with food and medicine and mobilized Russian-trained fighters to defend the city.[9]

    The Human Rights Watch states: Although the Russian government continued to declare itself officially neutral in the war, parts of Russian public opinion and a significant group in the parliament, primarily Russian nationalists, who had never been favourably disposed toward the Georgians, began to tilt toward the Abkhaz at least by December.[9] During this period the Abkhaz side obtained a large number of armor, tanks (T-72 and T-80) and heavy artillery. The question remains whether there were specific orders concerning the transfer of weapons to Abkhaz side and if so, whom they were issued by. Russian border guards allowed the Chechen fighters led by Shamil Basayev to cross into Abkhazia or at least did nothing to prevent them from arriving in the conflict zone.[33] The defense minister in the secessionist government and one of the main organizers of the Abkhaz armed units was the professional Russian military officer Sultan Sosnaliev from the Kabardino-Balkaria Republic.

    The most obvious example of Russian support to the Abkhaz side in 1993 was the bombing of Georgian-held Sukhumi by Russian fighter-bombers. The Russian Defence minister Pavel Grachev consistently denied it, but after Georgians succeeded in bringing down one SU-27 fighter-bomber and UN experts identified the dead pilot as Russian it became irrefutable. Nevertheless some equipment was turned over to Georgia according to the previous agreements in 1993. Russian general Grachev claimed, that Georgian side has painted the aircraft to resemble Russian Air Force aircraft and bombed their own positions, killing hundreds of their own people in Eshera and Sukhumi. This statement raised anger and utter contempt among Georgians toward the Russian side.

    The Russian journalist Dmitry Kholodov, who has witnessed the Russian bombardment of Sukhumi, wrote a couple of compiling reports with detailed description of humanitarian catastrophe:

    “The shelling of Sukhumi by Russians is the most disgusting thing in this war. All the residents of Sukhumi remember the first shelling. It took place on December 2, 1992. The first rocket fell on Peace Street. They struck at crowded places. The next strategic target was the town market, which was hit with great precision. Eighteen people were killed that day. There were always lots of people in the market.”[34]
    Kholodov also reported on the Russian volunteers fighting on the separatist side:

    “Russians, too, are fighting there. We often heard from Georgian guards how Russian mercenaries were attacking: It’s a blood-curdling sight – they have helmets and firm, bullet-proof jackets on and their legs are armored as well. They advance with their heads bent down, like robots ready to kill. There is no use shooting at them. No tanks are needed, they are followed by the Abkhaz behind.”[34]
    On February 25, the Georgian Parliament appealed to the UN, European Council and Supreme Council of the Russian Federation demanding the withdrawal of Russian forces from Abkhazia and stating, that Russia waged “an undeclared war” against Georgia.[35]

    Georgian Parliament adopted another resolution on April 28, 1993, which openly blamed Russia in political facilitation of ethnic cleansing and genocide against Georgians.[36]

    Russian policy during the final battle for Sukhumi in September 1993, immediately, after the breach of the ceasefire by the Abkhaz forces, appeared to follow several lines. Russian officials condemned the attack, issued calls to Abkhaz forces to cease the offensive and its accompanying human rights violations and reportedly cut off electricity and telephone service to parts of Abkhazia from September to December 1993. Russia also supported resolutions in the Security Council condemning Abkhaz forces for breaching the ceasefire. At the same time, the Russian government criticized the Georgian government for refusing, once the attack was underway, to negotiate. As the Human Rights Watch report notes “it is doubtful, however, that Russian forces in or near Abkhazia were as surprised as the Russian government seemed to be. Initiating an offensive as large as the one undertaken, in three different directions at once, must have required extensive movement of forces and resupply during the days leading up to it.” Russian forces on the Georgian-Abkhaz border, who were supposed to police the ceasefire made no attempt to forestall the attack. The Abkhaz weapons were stored near the front and were returned to the Abkhaz by Russian military mission when hostilities restarted.[37] Ataman Nikolay Pusko, a notable commander of some 1,500 Cossack volunteers fighting against Georgians in Abkhazia, later claimed, that his sotnia was the first to enter Sukhumi.[38]

    In a Time Magazine article published on October 4, 1993, Georgians said Russian Army officers provided Abkhazian separatists, at the beginning using mere hunting rifles and shotguns, with sophisticated weapons like BM-21 multiple rocket launchers and Sukhoi SU-25 jet aircraft, plus battlefield intelligence.[39]”

  17. Another thing “I am Russian”, the strongest support for Saakashvili during the last presidential & parliamentry elections was from Mingrelia.
    The Russians want to create problems in Mingrelia for Georgia, but the Mingrelians are patriotic Georgians.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mingrelian_people

    “The Mingrelians (Mingrelian: მარგალი, margali; Georgian: მეგრელები: megrelebi) are a subethnic group of Georgians that mostly live in Samegrelo (Mingrelia) region of Georgia. They also live in considerable numbers in Abkhazia and Tbilisi. Approximately 180,000-200,000 people of Mingrelian provenance have been expelled from Abkhazia as a result of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict in the early 1990s and the ensuing ethnic cleansing of Georgians in this separatist region.

    Most Mingrelians speak both the Mingrelian and Georgian language which belong to the South Caucasian (Kartvelian) linguistic family, but use only the Georgian alphabet.”

  18. Here is Russian, again, spouting the same old sovok propaganda.

    Repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat. Ignore the facts.

    Russian “knows” what people everywhere want – they “want to be ruled by rashans.”

    It is eminently clear that Rashan does not know the facts, does not want to know the facts, and does not care about facts.

    Sooo – Ukrainian is a “dialect” of Russian?

    Let’s see – in the Ukrainian elections, the Russians, through the Party of Regions, screamed like stuck pigs about the ballots.

    Why? Because there were in Ukrainian – and the Russians asserted very firmly that the Russians would not be able to recognize the “right” names on the ballots.

    That is far more than a dialect difference, and Rashan knows it.

    As Scott has correctly pointed out, Rashan is a chauvinist.

    And a sovok propagandist.

    путлер капут (Pootler kaput) – That was on a sign in Vladivostok.

    Those people know what they are talking about.

  19. Scott – Elmer

    I repeat historical names of Ukraina are also South-Russia and Malo Russia. The fact that after october 1917 this part of Russia was named ONLY Ukraina did not anything other than hatred of communists to Russia. Obviously that bolsheviky were russophobes as well as you Elmer and Scott are. Yes Stalin changed a historical border. But he does it to the detriment of Russia. Stalin create a Great Georgia and Great without any historical grounds. Approximately 70% territories of Soviet Ukraina are not historical related to this beautiful country. Kiev, Donbass, Crimea, Charkhov, Odessa, Nicolaev, Dnepropetrovsk – historical Russian regions Malorossia and Novorossia; Ruthenia is a country which wants independence. The other parts of Soviet Ukraina are historical parts of Moldavian (Ismail and Chernovtsy), Hungaria, Poland and Belorussia. Malorossia is a beautiful country I really love Kiev – Mother of Russian cities. Malorossia is a very glorious country. However Ukraina have not got any historical achievemets, any history without Russia. All of the Great Ukrainian successes were achieved by Malorossija – Ukraina as part of Russia.
    About Moldavia. Obviously Moldavia is a historically independence country which was founded by Russian princes and Cossack`s atamans in 14 century (Old Russian language was official Moldavian language until 17 century!). Romania was founded in 19 century but as alliance of Valachia and Moldavia but without historical part of Moldavia – Bessarabia which got a part of Russia in 1809 year. Well Moldavia people in Bessarabia are independence people no Romanian people also they have many similar features. You make mistake when wrote “Moldavia” or “Moldova” in quotation marks. Inverted commas would suit to Ukraina than to Moldova.

  20. elmer
    “путлер капут (Pootler kaput)”

    Are you antsemit Elmer?

  21. I think it is apparent that we are all wasting our time with this “I am Russian” character. He lives in his own little fantasy land bubble. Let’s hope he isn’t the voice of too many people. If he is, he is the poster boy for the ignorant and the aggressive.
    It is a strange world we live in.

  22. Russian, first regarding the accusation that I am a Russophobe, please recall the following response someone made regarding a post I had made previously

    scott
    I quotes: “Better than Peter, who made his country a great power
    Better than Katherine, who brought Russia into the lights of Europe
    Better than Alexander III, the Tsar Liberator
    Better than Lenin, whose mummified remains still grace Red Square
    Better than Pushkin, the greatest of Russian poets
    Better than Tolstoy, writer of perhaps the greatest novel of all time
    Better than Tchaikovsky, bard of the ages
    Better than Mendeleev, creator of one of, if not the, greatest tools in the history of chemistry
    Betterh than Kutuzov, who saved the world from Napoleon
    Better than Zhukov, who saved the world from Hitler (and don’t tell me it was Stalin who did that – Stalin just made the task harder and scarier for the other 50 million Soviet citizens who did)
    Better than Gagarin – the first man in space
    Better than Tereshkova – the first woman in space”ю
    This list shows again and again that Rusia is a Great Civilisation!!! And I am glad that you understood this fact.

    Now take a look and see who said it…

    https://larussophobe.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/uh-oh-russia-inserts-an-ossetia-into-ukraine/

    If you read my posts, you will see that I am not afraid to recognize and even celebrate Russia’s successes when they are deserved or to support Russia’s positions when they are deserving of support. I in fact have a great fondness for the Russian people and their nation, and my main problem is not with Russia but with its current leadership and they way that they are spiraling downwards towards a dangerous combination of nationalism, xenophobia, and authoritarianism. In other words it’s a recipe for fascism and I think that Russians deserve better than that.

    Malorossia, again, is a historical name applied to Ukraine by “Great” Russians to the North, and not by Ukrainians themselves. I do not deny the common bonds of history between the two nations – they are both clearly descended from Kievan Rus, but they gained distinctive characteristics from their geographic distinctiveness (Forest for Russia, steppe adn chernozom for Ukraine) and their historical separation from one another after the Mongol invasions. Ukraine, liberated by Lithuania and then joined to Poland, was largely defined by its links to the West, while Russia was in turn defined by continuations of Byzantine Eastern Traditions, defining itself as the Third Rome and largely isolating itself from Europe. (The one part that didn’t, Novgorod, got crushed and assimiliated by Moscow.)

    Although the name Ukraine is Polish in origin, (as in that place which is cut off from everywhere else) the term dates back as far as the 11th century, and was largely in local use on the Russian side of the border by the late 18th and early 19th century. In other words, Ukraine has as much independent national identity as the US or any Latin American state.

    The reason that the Bolsheviks had to adopt Ukrainian identity was that they had much less success there than in Russia proper. Since they could not destroy Ukrainian nationhood, they did their best to coopt it. Russian overlordship in Ukraine was marked by alternating periods of arrogant paternalism and vicious campaigns of Russification and attempted annhiliation of Ukrainian identity. Perhaps two historicals fact are key – under Polish rule, still harsh and hated as it was, Ukraine was the most highly educated region of the territory that was once Kievan Rus. After only two generations of Russian misrule, it sank to being the least educated. The second is that Russia failed to keep even the most basic of promises made at the Treaty of Pereyaslavl – to keep the Poles out – so that Ivan Mazepa, up to then a Russophile hetman if ever there was one, threw in his lot with the invading Swedes!

  23. G, you are right.

    Russian, you are really pathetic.

    Ти є дурний, паскудний кацап.

    Revisionist sovok fantasy history from Rooshan.

    Rus Ukraine became Christian in 988 A.D. – almost 200 years BEFORE that little pile of mud called maskva even existed.

    “malorossiya” exists in stupid little rooskies heads like yours, rooshan.

  24. Andrew

    You do not say anithing so you outrage me! You are nasty bigot!

  25. “I am Russian”, you are the bigot. You constantly spout racist comments regards Ukrainians, Georgians, Balts, and of course against all westerners.

    It is high time you opened your eyes and see the evil that has been done in Russia’s name for centuries.

    Your “Glorious” motherland has killed and opressed on an unimaginable scale for centuries.
    Due to the actions of the Russian government, Russia is hated and feared by all of its former slave states.

    If you want Georgians and Ukrainians and Balts and central asians to like you and your country, try treating them with respect.

    Respect their wishes to be free to choose their own destiny, stop trying to rebuild your empire, stop destabilising them, invading them, economically blockading them, stop harrassing their ethnic minorities that live in Russia.

    If you and your country can manage to do this, then you will earn their friendship.

    Better a loyal friend than an angry slave.

  26. Oh, and if Ukrainians never accomplished anything without Russian supervision, how come so much of the cultural flowering took place in Lviv where the forces of Russian suppression couldn’t reach it?

  27. Andrew-Scott-Elmer

    Ukraina is a Russian sister who was stolen and abuse by westerns.

    USA needed Ukraina only to harm Russia then this bautiful country is doom to failure as Jugoslavia!

    http://www.regnum.ru/english/1119970.html

  28. No – Ukraine is a beautiful country whose aspirations Russia exploited to destroy Poland. Five times over in fact (1667, 1763, 1792, 1795, and 1939.) And after each time, it made sure to betray their “Little Russian” sister as well.

    As for your article – one tiny island measuring 0.17 square miles does not a partition make. If anything, this is the Ukrainian version of Russia’s resolving its longstanding border disputes with China.

    http://weekly.com.ua/?rub=news&from=0&page=0&ncode=1233827884#open_news

    Speaking of China, there’s the real rub, isn’t it? How much has your country just put itself up for in hock to? Wasn’t it something along the line of $25 billion? Beware the dragon, my friend. Because it just loves to bite.

  29. Of course that being said, on a little reflection, one thing I definitely don’t wish on Russia, even with its current fascistic leadership, is Chinese hegemony in the Russian Far East. Not only is it not good for Russia. It is just as not-good, if not worse, for America…

  30. Scott

    Yes of course if instead of China would be located USA then it would be a new Kosovo in our Far-EST but fortunatelly West country have not got any influance in this place of world!

  31. “I am Russian”, you will be wishing for western neigbors when the chinese start laying claim to siberia.

  32. Andrew

    You westerns told about China threatening during tens years but China-Russian board is still peaceful in contrary to places which are under USA influance and control.

  33. Well, you have a peaceful border with Finland too. And they vastly prefer the Americans to you Russians.

  34. Never the less, as usual your posts are without merit or substance.

  35. Andrew Finlands (Suomi) prefer a peaceful lifa firstly. They do not like USA so Suomi is not a part of NATO.

    LA RUSSOPHOBE RESPONDS:

    If that is true it is a pity they live next to Russia, which has constantly invaded them throughout their entire history.

    Finland also routinely hosts conferences for major Russian opposition figures like Oleg Kozlovsky. If you think the Finns like or respect Russians, you are hitting the bottle way too hard.

  36. Um, Russian,

    Where exactly have there been more cross-border conflicts? Across the Amur or across the Bering Straits? Where are there demonstrations currently, in Primoriye or in Chukhotia? Of course, pretty much nobody lives in Chukhotia, but it seems to me that even with your recent bomber buzzings, the US-Russian border is FAR more peaceful than the Sino-Russian one.

    Furthermore, China and Russia are currently cordial because, well, they are both concerned about the US, and in halting the general growth of democracy throughout the world (or at least ensuring that said growth doesn’t cross into what they perceive as their respective spheres of influence.) As the center of world power continues to shift from Europe to Asia, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific, however, you can expect that to change. In ten years, it it quite probable that you will be writing about China with the same invective you use for the West. In twenty, it is possible that you will have to sign your comments with “I am Chinese” rather than “I am Russian” or maybe, considering your ultra-nationalism, as “I am Russian Underground Patriot.”

    As for Finland, to see exactly how fond Finns are of Russians right now, you should Google the words “North Stream” and see just what comes up.

  37. LR

    “If that is true it is a pity they live next to Russia, which has constantly invaded them throughout their entire history.”

    Every country to invaded to another countries and also every country was attacked by another countries. Russia invaded to another countries and was attacked by another countries (Gold Horda, Poland, Cremea, Franch, Sweden, German) but Russia won all enemies! You La Russophobe hate us because we are really succesfull and powerful nation!
    Did you hear about Mexica. How many times Mexica was attacked by USA. How many historical Mexicans territories were annexed by USA. I know that USA is occuping 70 % of Mexicans territoy now. In compare with Georgia (even if to agree to yours blubbering) USA makes more crimes then anything else. I repeat again and again YOU HAVE NOT ANY RIGHTS TO ACCUSE US BECAUSE YOUR OWN CRIMS MORE CRUEL AND TERRIBLE!

  38. Some historical problems here.

    While the US record in Mexico is certainly nothing to be proud of, Mexico was attacked a grand total of twice by the United States. Once in 1846 and once in 1916. In neither case was it either annexed by the US, nor was it formally partitioned between the US and Imperial and/or Nazi Germany. You might add Texas as a third, but then you would have to discount the validity of similar revolts that benefited Russia, such as the Khmelnitsky revolt that Russia used to annex Ukraine or the Georgian decision in 1801 to seek Russian protection against Persia. Poland and Lithuania, by contrast was attacked around 10 times depending how you count, partitioned 5 times, and annexed twice. The Mexican Cession accounts for approximately 40% of the original territory of Mexico, and if it were to be given back, the vast majority of the ethnically Mexican population in the ceded lands would not be happy as they worked very hard to get out of Mexico and into the US in the first place. Chances are that they would rush en masse into Oregon first chance they got.

    Russia has lost quite a few battles and wars in its day. They were tromped over by the Mongols (who then enjoyed equally overwhelming successes over the rest of the West), handed several defeats by Swedes and Poles in the Time of Troubles, crushed by a Swedish force 1/10 its size at Narva, and even after overcoming the Swedes, took “50 blows at the Prut when we should have taken 100” (quote Peter the Great) at the hands of the Turks, were beaten back by Frederick in the Seven Years’ War (in the midst of a grand European Coalition no less), got smacked down by Napoleon at Austerlitz and Tilsit before he made the tragic mistake of smashing his army against General Winter in 1812, were defeated in Crimea (and depended on the US to hold onto Alaska for them during the War), almost lost to Turkey again in 1878 at Plevna, were crucified by newcomer Japan in 1905, were destroyed as a nation in World War I, lost their proxy war against Fascists in Spain, were handed a humiliating set of defeats against Finland in the Winter War, barely survived the blitz of 1941 against Germany and survived in large part due to American production, were saved by masses of Chinese in Korea, and of course, lost in the Cold War (as much as you may pretend that one day, the Russians just got sick of it all and decided to shelve the whole project.)

    Now to be fair Russia has had more than its fair share of victories as well, some of the most impressive in history in fact, but if you think you can present as baldfaced a lie as you did above and get away with it, you are sorely mistaken.

    As for your accusations of whose crimes were worse, the Holodomor by itself stands as a crime greater than any the US is accused of. Only the Holocaust (Germany) and the Great Leap Forward (China) can compare.

  39. Oh, and here’s an interesting development regarding the “peaceful” Sino-Russian border and the “friendly” relations between the two nations:

    http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/asiapacific/news/article_1460406.php/Eight_feared_dead_after_Russia_sinks_Chinese_cargo_ship__2nd_Roundup__

  40. Scott

    “Only the Holocaust (Germany) and the Great Leap Forward (China) can compare”. I add – extermination of USA indians and Black slavery in USA plantations!
    “Holodomor” – a great hungry in all the USSR (no only Ukrainians died, but mainly Russians and Kazakhs) was happened in 1930-33 under communists, no Russians guvernment (e.g. Stalin was Georgian)! What has Russia to do with it?

  41. Russia had everything to do with it.
    Stalin may have been born in Georgia (he was also 1/2 Ossetian by the way), but he was described by Lenin as the perfect Russian chauvanist.
    By the way you moron, Russia abolished serfdom in 1861, and the USA abolished slavery in 1865. Both systems were abhorrent, but remember there was only slavery in the southern states of the US, the north was free.
    As for the extermination of the Native Americans (you show your racism by calling them “Indians”, they really hate that name), well Russian crimes during its imperial expansion dwarf anything that happened in north america.
    Russian genocide in the Caucasus, central asia, and Siberia was on a horrific scale.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
    http://www.faminegenocide.com/
    http://www.artukraine.com/famineart/russie.htm
    http://www.faminegenocide.com/2003-competition/07-luhovy-famine-genocide.html

  42. First on the Indians. While US Indian policy was racist to the extreme, it was not extermination. The main cause of death among Indians over the period was smallpox. Likewise, while slavery was evil, it was not genocide. And the US fought a civil war, which just happens to be the conflict that cost the most American lives in history, in order to remove the scourge of slavery from its soil. The only time Russia ever fought a civil war was after the October Revolution. Many many RUSSIANS fought and died in order to install and preserve a regime which you personally identify as evil personified (and pretend was installed by foreigners.)

    Likewise, while Stalin was ethnically Georgian, there is no doubt that he was Russified and subscribed to the theory of Russian supremacy in the USSR. Which language became the common tongue of the USSR? Was it Georgian? Ukrainian? Armenian? Kazakh? You know the answer as well as I do. The USSR was a society which needed Russian support above all others to achieve its goals and therefore placed Russian culture above all others of the Union as the framework of “Soviet” culture. Russian was the language of Homo Sovieticus. Russian culture was the cornerstone of Soviet Culture. Russian achievements were considered the grand historical achievements of all Soviet Peoples. (Even you, a dedicated anti-Bolshevik if ever there was one, once advocated the Soviet-supported lie that Ukrainians never achieved anything significant apart from the Russian people.) Russians made up the majority of the cabinet, the Party, the Politburo, the Red Army and its officer corps, and, most importanty, the NKVD. The USSR could not exist without Russia. Besides, if Stalin was such a Georgian at heart, why did he not pick the pseudonym “Stalinshvili” or “Stalinadze”? (Other than the fact that the Georgian word for steel probably isn’t Stahl like it is in Russian.) And again, for the millionth time, the Russian people have voted, and they have chosen to accept him not only as one of their own, but one of their greatest.

    The Holodomor was genocide, although it was as much directed at independent peasantry throughout the USSR as it was directed specifically against Ukrainians. Stalin was primarily interested in killing independent landholding peasants. For that reason, some historians prefer to use the word “democide” to infer that it was an economic segment of the population that was targeted.

    But within that, the murder and destruction of Ukrainians in particular was a key component of the whole crime. The fact that Southern Russians and Kazakhs could emigrate to where there was food while Ukrainians were prohibited from doing likewise shows how the genocide was directed specifically to exterminate the latter even as it was directed generally to destroy the former.

  43. Andrew-Scott

    1. When I says Indians I do not show any rasism because I says as well as every Russian always says. We got such name from your language and it is not my problem that you named their as “Indians” although name Native American is really more fair. The fact that you named Native Americans as “Indians” during centuries showed your chauvanism.
    2. Slavery in plantations was much more cruel than Russian serfdom. Russian serfdom was not Genocid, in addition such problems relate to Russians people (no Black etc.). Unlike Russian`s serfdom USA slavery was UNDISGUISED GENOCID of MILLIONS Black people (no white USA). Tens millions Black were spirited away from their homes in Africa and sent to USA as commons goods! Millions of them perished in such trip or later. It was a crime much more terrible than Holokoust.
    You said that area of slavery was located in only south states of USA. Firstly suburbs of Washington also had such plantations. Secondly a huge part of Russia did not relate to serfdom regions (e.g. Don, Kuban, Vologda, Archangelsk, Kostroma, Siberia, Far – Est). And almost 50 % peasants) was always ree.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s